This invention relates generally to systems and methods for facilitating payment transactions using a payment card, and more particularly to a financial transaction card having a signature block that includes a visually distinct data field configured to display and facilitate a useful life of a card validation code, and method of using the same.
Financial transaction cards have made great gains in the United States and elsewhere as a means to attract financial accounts to financial institutions and, in the case of credit cards, as a medium to create small loans and generate interest income for financial institutions. Nonetheless, the financial transaction card industry is subject to certain well-known problems.
Taking the credit card industry, for example, it is well-known that at least some persons will engage in illegal or potentially illegal activities. Specifically, one person may steal a credit card from another person and attempt to use the credit card to purchase products, pay for services, or attempt to utilize the card to obtain cash. Another illegal activity involving credit cards includes a person attempting to steal credit card information by “skimming” sensitive financial data (i.e., stored within the magnetic strip, etc.) from a genuine card, and then applying the stolen data to a cloned card. The attacker then uses the cloned card with the genuine card data to conduct fraudulent transactions without the knowledge of the cardholder.
Such problems are not limited to credit cards. Other examples include debit cards, gift cards, stored value cards, and check cards. Of course, in certain transactions, for example, on-line and telephonic transactions, physical possession of the financial transaction card for presentment to the merchant is not needed. Rather, only the numbers (e.g., account numbers and/or expiration date) associated with the financial transaction card are needed to complete a transaction. The fact that a physical financial transaction card does not have to be presented to a merchant for certain transactions only amplifies the problems mentioned herein.
The other parties involved in facilitating such transactions, namely the acquirer bank, the issuer bank, and the financial transaction card network, which is sometimes referred as an interchange, generally do not require the legal cardholder to pay for such fraudulent transactions. Such a requirement will likely result in the loss of goodwill and perhaps the loss of the legal cardholder as a customer. However, the fraudulent transactions are a loss to one or more of these entities. As a result, companies have tried to find an effective way to ensure the security of transactions, especially those in which the card is not present, and to decrease the risk of theft or misuse of financial information.
At least one known security feature used with such transaction cards incorporates the use of a card validation code on the signature block of the financial transaction card (see FIG. 4). As shown in FIG. 4, the signature block is located on the back side of the financial transaction card. The signature block contains preprinted indicia, such as lines and/or the network or interchange provider name and/or logo. In the example embodiment, angled lines are shown extending between the side edges of the top face of the signature block. This preprinted indicia acts as a security feature (i.e., tamper evidence properties) by showing evidence of the removal of the cardholder's signature from the signature block. Printed on the signature block is also a set of alphanumeric characters, representing a portion of the cardholder's account number. In alternative embodiments, a full account number may be printed on the signature block. Also located in the signature block shown in FIG. 4, directly contiguous to the partial account number, is a three digit security code, also known as the card validation code (“CVC”). The card validation code may also be referred to as a card security code or card verification value, and is sometimes referred to as CVC2 or CVV2. The CVC can be an alphanumeric code constructed by a cryptographic process based on card data, such as the card number, the expiration date, etc., and is unique to the card. Merchants and others who accept credit cards, debit cards, and the like for payment use the CVC and other methods to prevent use of such cards by those who are not authorized to do so. Supplying this code in a transaction not carried out in person is intended to verify that the customer has the legitimate card in his or her possession. Unfortunately, the proximate location of the CVC with respect to the partial account number on the signature block has created problems in its utility. For example, cardholders have difficulty distinguishing the partial account number from the CVC due to the close proximity of the two sets of numbers in the signature block. The appearance suggests one cohesive set of numbers instead of two distinct sets. As a result, transactions are lost because of the misidentification of the CVC.
To overcome the flaws of the previous embodiment shown in FIG. 4, another card design was created in which the CVC is distinctly separate from the partial account number (see FIG. 5). In this known embodiment shown in FIG. 5, the CVC is printed on a designated area outside of the signature block. The partial account number remains printed on the signature block and the CVC is printed off the signature panel in a white space on the card body (i.e., on the plastic itself). This design enables cardholders to more easily identify the CVC as separate from the partial account number. However, in this other embodiment, the white space containing the CVC and the signature block are at different heights relative to the back side of the card, with the signature block being at a greater relative height. As a result, during the indent printing process, wherein the partial account number is printed on the signature block and the CVC is printed on the white space of the card face, the printing head is closer to the signature block than to the white area on the card body. This difference in distance between the surfaces and the printing head, and the difference in the types of surfaces being printed on often results in different depths of indentation and different print qualities. For example, the CVC located on the white area of the card body may receive less indentation and less ink from the printing head because of the increased distance between the white area surface of the card and the printing head, and because of the type of material being printed on. With less ink being applied to display the CVC, the security code is susceptible to being more easily removed from the face of the financial transaction card, either intentionally or through normal wear and tear on the card, which could result in potentially preventing a cardholder from conducting a card-not-present transaction and a lower quality of indentation hampering a merchant's ability to validate the card.
Accordingly, a financial transaction card having a signature block that includes a validation code that is easily distinguishable by a user and resists removal is needed. A financial transaction card having a validation code with an increased useful life (i.e., a validation code that resists removal from wear) is needed.